Page 17

AD ALTA

JOURNAL OF INTERDISCIPLINARY RESEARCH

between individual dimensions of creativity and need and ability
to achieve closure. We have identified significant positive
relationship of figural originality with fluency and flexibility and
statistically highly important, negative relationship between
figural fluency and flexibility with elaboration.

The fourth research question was whether we could assume the
existence of statistically important, positive correlation between
need for closure and figural dimension of creativity. As you can
see in Table 2, we haven't identified any statistically important
relationship between figural dimensions of creativity and need
for closure, what is in accordance with the results of Sarmány-
Schuller and Sollár (2002).

Table 2 Spearmann's correlation coefficients between
dimensions of creativity, NFC and AACS.

AACS

NFC

-,094

-,093

-,080

,114

,010

,829

,267

-,351

-,058

,285

-,245

,068

-,115

,056

,135

**Significance level is p < 0,01.

The fifth research question was whether we could assume
relationship between independence from the field, which
requires the ability of identification of simple figure in the
complex of figures, and figural elaboration, which is typical for
people who work with details, formulate them elegantly and
complete them into whole. As we can see results in Table 3, we
have identified statistically highly important, medium strong,
positive relationship between ascending independence from the
field and figural elaboration.

Table 3 Results of Spearmann's correlation analysis between
dimensions of creativity and GEFT.

GEFT

,352

,037

,020

-,027

**Significance level is p < 0,01.

On the basis of analogical relationship between concepts of
dependence and independence from the field, need for closure
and ability to achieve it, we assumed, that these three concepts, in
case of identification of statistically important relationships, could be
linked together and maybe also create even determining effect, which
wasn't confirmed. On account of the first research question,
statistically important, negative relationship between independence
from the field and the ability to achieve closure was confirmed.

Goodenough (1978, In Nákonečný, 1995) states that individuals
independent from the field go along with “inner reference ambit” and
those dependent from the field rather go along “external reference
ambit”, thus they are less active in accepting information. Perception
of people who are dependent on the field is significantly determined
by surrounding organization, which makes individual's identification
of specific fragments in organization harder. Subject not dependent
on the field has no problem with identification of fragment in the
complex of more complicated organization, which points to slightly
better level of space orientation skills. Among other things, Jia,
Zhang & Li (2014) confirmed that individuals who are independent
from the field are better in filtrating relevant information from
irrelevant; which in their opinion is caused by the better selectivity.

According to Bar-Tal (1994, p. 46), the ability to achieve closure
“represents ability, which individual uses to evade information,
which can't be grasped and categorized to their already existing
cognizance.” This means that individual like this selectively
chooses the information, which is consistent with their actual
cognizance, attitude, prototype or prejudice, which makes them
decide quickly without longer thinking. According to this
finding we formerly assumed that individual independent from
the field will be more effective in process of identification of
relevant and consistent information than individual dependent
from the field. Our results point to opposite tendency (r = -0,138,
p < 0,5). It can be explained by the fact, that individual
independent from the field probably doesn't notice only

information consistent and relevant to his/her attitudes,
prejudices or prototypes, but also notices information less
distinct, which isn't relevant and consistent with his/her existing
knowledge structure. They don't decide quickly, rather slowly
and they think more about specific problem. We could possibly
assume, that if there was a performance type tool, which could be
used for valid measuring the ability of achieving closure
systematically, we would be able to identify much stronger,
positive relationship between tool like this and ascending
independency from the field. Insufficient discriminatory validity of
AACS survey could even explain lower value of relationship
between the ability to achieve closure and independency from the
field; since the survey alone measures only whether the participant
finds himself as a decisive person and thus quickly (heuristically)
or slowly (systematically) deciding and it doesn't measure the
process of filtering relevant and consistent information from
inconsistent with actual scheme, prototype or scenario.

Similar interpretation of results holds true also for relationship
between the need for closure and independency from the field.
According to Kruglanski (1990), we can define the need for
closure as every person's desire to achieve the answer to
assigned topic, any answer which reduces confusion and
ambiguity. Any answer means the answer achieved heuristically,
the answer, which is possible to achieve as it works on the
concept of the ability to achieve closure by filtering relevant and
consistent information from that inconsistent (with existing
attitude, scheme or scenario) or by substitution (replacing the
answer with answer to another question). The results of analysis
of relationship between need for closure and independency from
the field demonstrated trivial, statistically unimportant, negative
relationship (r=-0,64, p = 219). Despite the relationship being
trivial, we can see, likewise in ability to achieve closure,
tendency to inverse proportion between need for closure and
independency from the field. Ruisel (2004), under the findings
of Witkin et al (1962), states that individuals independent from
the field prefer active studying and formulation of hypothesis,
but mainly, they notice less conspicuous attributes of impulses
within formulation of hypothesis themselves. We can possibly
draw conclusion, that they also have stronger need to achieve
closure systematically, not heuristically. Statistically
unimportant, trivial, negative correlation achieved by us points
out to this conclusion. The fact, that it is statistically unimportant
and trivial could be caused by NFC survey's limit. NFC survey is
formed of facets preference of order, preference of predictability,
decisiveness, discomfort from ambiguity and rigidity. We can
find out from the survey whether the respondent likes order in
life, predictability of situations, whether he/she is decisive, hates
ambiguity and whether he/she is rigid; however, what we can't
find out from survey is whether he/she desires to achieve answer
to assigned question at any cost, even heuristically. Again, we
can assume, that if there was a tool with perfect discriminatory
validity, the option of identification of statistically important,
stronger relationship within representative aggregate.

Concerning the third question, the analysis didn't prove any
statistically important relationships between single dimensions
of creativity and the ability to achieve cognitive structure. As we
can see the results in Table 4, concerning figural elaboration,
significant relationship between ability to achieve closure was
nearly confirmed. The reason why any statistically important
relationship between figural dimension of creativity and the
ability to achieve closure didn't occur can be wrong validity and
reliability of Torrance's test of figural creativity. Since the
norms, which serve as basis for evaluating figural originality and
flexibility, are relatively invalid (in actual information and
cultural progress) and require re-standardization.

Table 4 Results of correlation coefficients of AACS and
dimensions of figural creativity analysis

AACS

corr.

coeff.

-,058

,068

,056

,135

Sig.

,241

,207

,249

,051

- 17 -